This is the mail archive of the libc-ports@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the libc-ports project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [PATCH v2 0/10] Tilera (and Linux asm-generic) support for glibc


On Sat, 12 Nov 2011, Arnd Bergmann wrote:

> On Friday 11 November 2011, Roland McGrath wrote:
> > > For what it's worth, I know that there are other architectures waiting
> > > to benefit from glibc support for the new Linux "asm-generic" ABI, so
> > > there is certainly interest in the community.
> > 
> > That's all still libc-ports territory.
> 
> Is this going to change with ARMv8? Right now, we only have openrisc, unicore32,
> hexagon, c6x, and tile using the common ABI, plus lm32, nios2, unicore64 and a
> few even lesser ones lined up, all of which are certainly libc-ports material.
> 
> However, 64 bit armv8 is looking like it will have broad support from
> hardware and linux vendors, certainly more so than ia64, sh or sparc, which
> are all currently part of the main glibc repository. Is the policy to simply
> maintain the status quo or would armv8 get put into the main glibc tree once
> it reaches critical mass?

There's no need to overstate your case by listing architectures with no 
MMU or with no copyright assignment for the GCC and Binutils ports.  
Architectures with no MMU are completely irrelevant to glibc.  The lack of 
upstream tool ports may not be an automatic blocker to adding an 
architecture to glibc's ports, but it certainly makes such a port less 
useful and harder for people to test.

I have not seen an ARMv8 ARM or ABI specifications, but I doubt it would 
make sense for a 64-bit ARM port to be separate from the 32-bit port; 
presumably it would be desirable to be able to have one set of installed 
headers working with both -m32 and -m64, just as for x86_64, Power 
Architecture and other such cases, and various other files will probably 
be shared between 32-bit and 64-bit variants.  This is similar to Roland's 
observation that most if not all x32 code belongs with the x86_64 port 
<http://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2011-07/msg00132.html>.

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]